ESPN cutting nearly $100 million in on-air talent
- Thread starter Chris McLaughlin
- Start date
Too many talking heads putting social issues above sports.
Doubt it's that. I think it has more to do with ESPN no longer having a sports monopoly and the emergence of the competition upping their game. FS1, NFLN, etc.. No longer is ESPN your only choice for sports.
i remember a time when sportscenter, even the early afternoon shows, where were you got most of your sports related news. honestly, with twitter/facebook/espn.com/whatever you get the news, and commentary relating to it, as it happens, by the time they discuss it on pti, around the horn, sportscenter, whatever it's old news by then.
It will be interesting to see who gets canned. ESPN's sins are many. And too damn political is not the least of these, along with its arrogance in pretending sports it has no rights to don't exist and its inceasant NBA hype.
It seems to me that ESPN's "talent" (sic) breaks down into several groups.
- The arguers. ESPN's day is filled with these argument shows, which can be summed up as a mix of limosine liberal white guilt preaching and incessant talk about the (not really that popular) NBA soap opera.
- The lesbians. Really a subset of the arguers, they ply the man hating leftist agenda.
- The (supposed) insiders. Generally one sport men such as Olney, Katz, Melrose, or Kurkjian, who are (or claim to be) privy to insider information on sports transactions.
- The (very few remain) anchors. Back when Sports Center was a real show they had people who could read the cue cards and tell you the score of Denver @ Seattle. Few remain, because they really don't do the show any more.
- The characters. Vitale, Coroso, Kornheiser, and such.
- The eye candy. Know nothing ex-barmaids who ask incipid questions of coaches at half time.
- The PBP men. The core of ESPN, or any of its ilk, is games. But, really, have you ever sat down for a game and flicked through the various channels and said to yourself "well, X is calling that game, I will chose it for that reason". I haven't. It is a skill, but there are 1000s of people who can do it and any competant one will do.
If I had to bet, I would say that ESPN will double down on the politics and layoff a lot of PBP guys.
-
It seems to me that ESPN's "talent" (sic) breaks down into several groups.
- The arguers. ESPN's day is filled with these argument shows, which can be summed up as a mix of limosine liberal white guilt preaching and incessant talk about the (not really that popular) NBA soap opera.
- The lesbians. Really a subset of the arguers, they ply the man hating leftist agenda.
- The (supposed) insiders. Generally one sport men such as Olney, Katz, Melrose, or Kurkjian, who are (or claim to be) privy to insider information on sports transactions.
- The (very few remain) anchors. Back when Sports Center was a real show they had people who could read the cue cards and tell you the score of Denver @ Seattle. Few remain, because they really don't do the show any more.
- The characters. Vitale, Coroso, Kornheiser, and such.
- The eye candy. Know nothing ex-barmaids who ask incipid questions of coaches at half time.
- The PBP men. The core of ESPN, or any of its ilk, is games. But, really, have you ever sat down for a game and flicked through the various channels and said to yourself "well, X is calling that game, I will chose it for that reason". I haven't. It is a skill, but there are 1000s of people who can do it and any competant one will do.
If I had to bet, I would say that ESPN will double down on the politics and layoff a lot of PBP guys.
-
Lebron Lebron Tebow Lebron, Lebron. Lebron Tebow Lebron Lebron Tebow. Tebow! Lebron! Tebow.
Lebron.
Lebron.
Earlier, they talked for half a damn hour about a timeout call. Not exaggerating. When you're a major television station paying grown men millions of dollars to talk about a TIMEOUT taken in a college basketball game, you have some serious issues going on.
Sam...
- "The lesbians. Really a subset of the arguers, they ply the man hating leftist agenda." SAY WHAT ???
- "The lesbians. Really a subset of the arguers, they ply the man hating leftist agenda." SAY WHAT ???
It's simple economics, read the first line, average LOSING 3 million viewers per year. In the next 3 years that's 10 million viewers.
We took a beating in our last TV contract, but in the long run the SEC and ACC payouts espn has signed may not be sustainable. These cuts are an indication of that.
We took a beating in our last TV contract, but in the long run the SEC and ACC payouts espn has signed may not be sustainable. These cuts are an indication of that.
Acc sec etc will get theirs. The rest of us will Be left with Facebook live feeds
IMHO,
The future of sports TV, eventually, is on the internet, as pay-per-view, pay-per-team or pay-per-conference internet feeds. Two things have to happen for that to come in. First, most people's internet has to get WAY better than it is now. Fact is streaming live sports content is still not possible in many homes. The second is that the security has to get WAY better. There will always be geeks that can steal anything, but it is just way too easy now.
ESPN's issues are many and well discussed. College plays a part in it, as does the NFL, but the epic failure of the empty suit management of ESPN is spelled N B A. ESPN bult a sports argument model for non-game times (watch any weekday afternoon up to and including the hip-hop idiocy of the 6 PM "sportscenter" and tell me otherwise) based on NBA, NBA, NBA, NBA, NBA. Becuase, of course, arguing about the NBA is easy. Lifestyles, this one likes that one, this one's sister is mad at her ex-boyfriend, blah, blah, blah. Taking about serious sports takes a lot of knowledge. Having built this hype machine, the newcomer networks tricked ESPN into a MASSIVE over-bid for the NBA. ESPN paid so much money for a sport that really draws flies in its meaningless regular season and is ignored by 90% or more even in its overlong playoffs. Add to this an NFL contract that loses money, and driving away viewers with unfair political preaching, and is is the EPIC FAIL.
Disney will spin off ESPN within two years. It is becoming a drag on the stock.
As to the other three network's attempts at cloneing, Fox did it too well. Rather than take a page out of its own book, which is be DIFFERENT (FNC re: CNN) it just copied ESPN's NBA obsessed format, even hiring away some of its "talent". But it saved big $$ with no NBA or NFL contracts. Good college content, NASCAR, a little MLB. It could have done better in the non-game time, but it will do well by keeping costs down. NBC just shows infomercial crap during non-game time, and limits it game content, other than NASCAR, to some off-beat conferences and stuff like Eurosoccer. Still it can make money. CBS is likewise a fail. It wanted to start a sport channel, but not pay for much content. Ends up showing niche sports like rodeo. You do have to have some broad based content.
Of the independents, ASN is dead, no matter what they say. The One World Sports channel is too. That leaves BeIn, which might just do OK. The trick is to have enough of its original non-American sports content to keep that niche happy and bring in American content in order to get on every system out there.
I look for BeIn to end up as CUSA primary TV partner in the next deal.
No wonder ESPN is shitting the bed. They just spent $1.5 billion per year to the NBA, promoted the crap out of Spurs/Warriors Saturday night, and both teams rest their starters.
You mean people STILL watch ESPN programming other than the game telecasts??? I mean, watch ANY game telecast on ESPN, including the recent conference tournaments, major or "mid major". No matter which broadcast tandem, I guarantee that 40-50 per cent of the time was not devoted to the game being played, and shown, but rather to the UPCOMING TELECAST ON ESPN, such as "the Dookies vs the Fart Heels", etc., etc., blah, blah, blah. Then at halftime, they go to talking head "experts" in the studio, including at least one token ex-NBA player who, somehow, managed NOT to have fried his brain on coke, etc., during his playing days, and thus can utter a somewhat cogent sentence.
Back to the game, 2nd half, still 50-50 game play by play and "Dookie vs. Heels" hype and ESPN GAME promo. Then, following the game, network goes to Sports Center, 3 more talking heads spend a minute summarizing the game just completed, and then, remaining show consists of the "Dookies vs. Heels" hype and promoting it and upcoming ESPN telecasts. NO THANK YOU!!
Back to the game, 2nd half, still 50-50 game play by play and "Dookie vs. Heels" hype and ESPN GAME promo. Then, following the game, network goes to Sports Center, 3 more talking heads spend a minute summarizing the game just completed, and then, remaining show consists of the "Dookies vs. Heels" hype and promoting it and upcoming ESPN telecasts. NO THANK YOU!!
espn jumped the sharks monday with their 24 hour bracket challenge marathon....and mike golic jr should be pissed and embarrassed
Who doesn't love this segment? Come on, this great TV.
Edit - Dang - on mobile, won't post the link. Just saved you guys 10 minutes of your life watching Lavar Ball play nerf basketball one on one . Awful.
Edit - Dang - on mobile, won't post the link. Just saved you guys 10 minutes of your life watching Lavar Ball play nerf basketball one on one . Awful.
Lavar Ball is endemic of what's wrong with cable sports networks. Its like the modern day Gong Show - if you're willing to get up there and act like a fool, they'll give you a mike, a spotlight, and Camera 1.
Cutting talent? I guess Stephen A Smith will still be there. Yesterday went to espn.com to look for scores and NCAA update. The whole website was boxing. I don't get it, and they are fascinated now with women's sports. Nothing against that, but let's face it. The mass of sports fans do not care about anything women's sports.
Women's sports gets less support than ECHL level hockey in America, yet as part of their social agenda ESPN feels required to treat it at the same level as men's sports.
It is actually worse than that. ESPN's arguers always have some social cause to pontificate upon. Currently bitching and moaning about the women's ice hockey team. A team that virtually NOBODY cares about, actually on strke because they do not make a "living wage". They make $85K each. For doing something NOBODY cares about. On top of having gotten a FREE education courtesy of Title IX. Memo, if you don't like the deal, don't watch. Well, umm, nobody is watching anyway.
Before that they got all in a wad because football is dangerous. Duh. Who knew. Football is a way to get wealthy beyond your wildest dreams, and dangerous. Don't like it? Don't watch.
And we get a weekly pontification about how unfair it all is that the poor little players have to spend a few years learning their skills in college and not get paid. Boo hoo. Ever talked to a med student? Four year college (on his own $) four years med school (on his own $) last 2 years of that are free work for ultra profitable university hospitals, then two or three or four more years of restricted earnings ($60K) work for a university hospital working 60 hours a week. All to get a, quite nice, but hardly anything like what an NFL player makes after THREE years of college. Don't like it? Don't watch.
Then you have the daily pontification about how "courageous" players are for taking stands against the supposed racial problems of this great nation. Players born in the dark segregated days of the 1990s.
How about covering the ball game?
No, they don't. You have been the king on here of posting false and misleading information for a decade.
Here, let me try: I just lubed up a Superman lego model and fornicated with it. Now, I can say "I just had sex with a Super model!"
They also overpaid for college football, the ratings have not been what they thought and they are losing on it big-time.
Yes they do. It is right on the USA Hockey website. About $210K in Olympic years, less the other 3, averages out to $85 to $100K depending on whose math you use. And understand this is 99.9% from money generated from men's hockey. In a free market, as Tony Kornheiser (of ESPN) said about a similar delusional demand by WNBA players, "they can work in France, or they can sell French fries." People that are really good at a sport nobody cares about are in the same economic catagory as buggy whip makers. High skill, no demand.
Care to provide the link so we can all see that what you are stating is entirely different than what USA Hockey's statement says?
The last time you were challenged to provide a link, it stated something entirely different than what you were claiming. It was as bad as the time you argued that 75% of all black students at Auburn University were on athletic scholarships there.
Before you try too hard, think about this: If the hockey players made an average of $85,000 each like you claim, why is their attorney fighting to get them $68,000 per year (plus maternity leave, childcare, etc.)? Their own attorney is fighting for them to get lower than what they earn now?
Your claim is extremely misleading. Those numbers take into account the cost for each player to travel to/from mandatory tournaments/games/practices, the cost for their food and lodging, any bonuses provided by U.S. Olympics IF they win a gold medal, etc. It is entirely different than them getting paid $85,000 like you claim.
ESPN/ABC is getting its ass kicked right now by running ads on their Saturday Night games the past two weeks and ending up putting crap on TV with the main players resting.
